^iMKaamsi 



ll. 



I 





197 



sure, the whale fishery does not need bait, but the fishermen {>;et supplies for their 

 own support, and to enable them to carry on the fishery ; and they continue to do 

 so until those islands come to be inhabited by more civilized people. So it is with 

 the Greenland fisheries. Then come restrictions, more or less, sometimes by Treaty, 

 and sometimes by local statutes, which the foreign Governments feci themselves 

 obliged to respect; if they do not, it becomes a matter of diplomatic correspon- 

 dence, and might be a cause of war. 



The history of this matter is, that the custom for fishermen to obtain supplies 

 and bait from countries at various stages of civiliz-ation is most ancient, most 

 natural, most necessary, most humane, and one for vvl'.lcii no compensation has 

 ever been asked by any civili/.i>d nation, because it is supposed to be for mutual 

 benefit. It is for the benefit of the ' Iicrmcn to get his supplies, but the Islanders 

 would not sell them unless they thought it was also beneficial to themselves. So 

 statutes do not create tiie right, but only regulate it. So do 'I'reaties. They 

 regulate, and sometimes limit the rights, but they seldom, if ever, enlarge them. 

 In looking at this subject, your Honours will fnid such has l)ei'n the iiistory of the 

 fisheries on tiie nortii-east coast of America. Tlie fishermen began, long before 

 these islands were well settled, even before they had recognized Governments upon 

 them, to exercise all the privileges and rights wirici\ belong to fisiicrmen in all parts 

 of the world where they arc not limited by Statutes or Treaties. It was a case 

 altogether sui (jcneris. Fishing is an innorcnf pussfuje along the coast. It is an 

 innocent um; antl an innocent use and transit are always allowed. The Frencii claimed, 

 and the British claimed, the Newfoundland fisheries, and at last a Treaty settled 

 their claims. It did not give rights, but adjusted tiiem. And so it was with us. 

 While we were |)art of Great Britain, we had all tiio privileges of British subjects ; 

 but the Britisii in Newfoundland had very few claims which were not contested, 

 and some were entirely in the hands of the French. When we were severed from 

 the Crown, the question arose whether there was any reason why vvc should not 

 continue to fish where we had always fished. We did not seek to make any claim 

 in regard to property in the islands ; we did not ask for any privilege not a fishing 

 privilege. The question arose whether we had not still the right to fish as an 

 innocent pursuit, even though within the limits of three miles; and the three-mile 

 limit, and what it meant, was not then settled. We must not, however, discuss this 

 subject lis if there had always been an exact law, from tlie time of Moses down, 

 relating to the three-mile limit, and what the powers were. All this has grown up 

 within very recent times, and, indeed, there are very few persons now who know 

 what is meant by it. It was long contended that the right of all States over the 

 three miles was for fiscal purposes and purposes of flefence only, and as the subject 

 has been very fully argued in a recent case in Kngland, nothing can probably be 

 added to the reasons given on each side. The matter continuecl in that position. 

 We fished without reference, and thought we had the right (o do it. We knew it 

 did no harm. The fishermen are, by the law of nations, a peculiar class, having 

 special privileges. Their status is diflerent, in time of war, from that of a 

 merchantman or man-of-war. Having this question of the three-mile limit to deal 

 with, one which was long disputed between the United States am! Great Britain, 

 and one which was always looked upon as disputed, which had had a slow and 

 steady growth for many years, and al)out w hieh no one can dogmatize, they have 

 endeavoured to arrange it as best they could. Your Honours will find that in the 

 very first Treaty, that of 1783, it is stated : — 



" It is ii),'r('i'(l tliiil, tUi' |ii'<)|ili; of till' I'liiti'd St;iti's slmli (■(ui/i.ii'f to < iijiiji iminiilcstcd IJic ri^'lit Id 

 tiiko fish of oviMV kind nii ilic (liiiiid liiink, mid im all tlic ullii'r liuiiks iil' Xcwrniiiidliiiid ; idso in tiii- 

 (iiilf 111' St. l-iiwii'iR'f, and at all other jiliu't's in tlu' .'oa wliciv tliu iiiiiaiiitaiits nl' liotii I'mmliu's used at 

 any time heiiitofore to tisli," 



That was looked upon as dealing with existing rights, the exact limitations of 

 which must rest solely in agreement. It was not a gift, as the French gave Dunkirk 

 to England, or as ^Mexico gave California to the United States. It was like an 

 adjustment of disputed territory. The only <|uestioii settled in the first Treaty, 

 that of 178;}, was that we should fish as before; nothing was said about the three- 

 mile line. When we come to the Treaty of 181S we find it stated: — 



" Wlierciw ditleieni'is have arisen, &c.'' 



By that Treaty it is agreed, that on certain parts of the const we shall have 

 thcTright to take fish ; that on certain parts we shall have the right to drv and 

 [280] 2 E 



